Lance Armstrong vs. USADA
Discussion
As is pointed out in 'The Armstong Lie' this is more a story about power (or rather its abuse) than doping in many ways. LA's abuse of the power he acquired was scandalous when you look at it objectively.
However, Christoph Bassons comments about Armstrong in this piece are worth reading.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycli...
It's very easy to vilify LA or (to paraphrase Dylan Moran) sit in our armchairs shouting instructions or abuse at elite athletes. clearly though, LA being caught hasn't delivered a clean peleton despite frantic jumping up and down of certain riders and teams to the contrary.
However, Christoph Bassons comments about Armstrong in this piece are worth reading.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycli...
It's very easy to vilify LA or (to paraphrase Dylan Moran) sit in our armchairs shouting instructions or abuse at elite athletes. clearly though, LA being caught hasn't delivered a clean peleton despite frantic jumping up and down of certain riders and teams to the contrary.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/former-tour-de-fra...
De Telegraaf contacted the 25 living TDF winners to ask whether they think Armstrong should be given his TDF victories back.
2 didn't respond.
2 had no opinion.
2 refused to answer the q.
7 said no
12 said yes.
The 2 who refused to answer the q were Merckx and Contador. Hmm.
The 12 who said he should be given back his titles included Indurain, Delgado, Roche, Andy Schleck and Oscar Pereiro. Hmm.
Wiggins, Froome and Evans said no.
De Telegraaf contacted the 25 living TDF winners to ask whether they think Armstrong should be given his TDF victories back.
2 didn't respond.
2 had no opinion.
2 refused to answer the q.
7 said no
12 said yes.
The 2 who refused to answer the q were Merckx and Contador. Hmm.
The 12 who said he should be given back his titles included Indurain, Delgado, Roche, Andy Schleck and Oscar Pereiro. Hmm.
Wiggins, Froome and Evans said no.
That is very telling - though I guess if they don't it means that for 7 years him plus x years others that the TDF was an utter farce and had no winner or placed racers at all.
I wonder if it would have been better to not let the cat out of the bag and deal with it behind closed doors within the cycling world only.
I wonder if it would have been better to not let the cat out of the bag and deal with it behind closed doors within the cycling world only.
The fact they said yes surely takes credibility away from Indurain, Delgado, Roche, Schleck and Pereiro? That period of the sport has now been exposed for what it was.
Armstrong (and many, many others of course) are cheats who broke the rules. When you do that and get caught you lose claim to whatever you won, because you won it fraudulently and rightly so.
How Indurain et al can look anyone in the sport in the eye after suggesting an epic cheater should have his fraudulent victories returned to him is beyond me.
However, cycling does seem to be a whipping boy for doping scandles doesn't it. Asafa Powell testing positive didn't seem to put the spotlight on Jamaican sprinting like many think it perhaps should have. If anyone thinks doping in all its forms isn't going on in EVERY other professional sport they are of course deluding themselves.
Professional cycling and cycling fans need to accept that what happened can't be changed and that to think the peleton is clean now is naive. Perhaps though, the sport might have been shaken enough by all this coming out for a cheating epidemic on such an epic scale not to happen again. At least for a while anyway.
The bottom line is this. When huge amounts of money are on offer for winning (whatever the sport) a frighteningly large number of people will do almost anything to get their hands on it. The money in professional sports isn't going away anytime soon, so it's business as usual.
Armstrong (and many, many others of course) are cheats who broke the rules. When you do that and get caught you lose claim to whatever you won, because you won it fraudulently and rightly so.
How Indurain et al can look anyone in the sport in the eye after suggesting an epic cheater should have his fraudulent victories returned to him is beyond me.
However, cycling does seem to be a whipping boy for doping scandles doesn't it. Asafa Powell testing positive didn't seem to put the spotlight on Jamaican sprinting like many think it perhaps should have. If anyone thinks doping in all its forms isn't going on in EVERY other professional sport they are of course deluding themselves.
Professional cycling and cycling fans need to accept that what happened can't be changed and that to think the peleton is clean now is naive. Perhaps though, the sport might have been shaken enough by all this coming out for a cheating epidemic on such an epic scale not to happen again. At least for a while anyway.
The bottom line is this. When huge amounts of money are on offer for winning (whatever the sport) a frighteningly large number of people will do almost anything to get their hands on it. The money in professional sports isn't going away anytime soon, so it's business as usual.
FredericRobinson said:
If Armstrong has his TdF wins taken away the same should apply to other proven / confessed dopers, it hasn't though.
I couldn't agree more. Bjarne Riis and Jan Ulrich certainly should have their titles stripped too.The trouble is that these people apparently don't understand why it is cheating. All of them seem to think that because they were all doing it, it means no one was cheating. They don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that it is cheating because it is against the rules.
Maybe they cling to that as a way to justify it to themselves perhaps?
neilr said:
FredericRobinson said:
If Armstrong has his TdF wins taken away the same should apply to other proven / confessed dopers, it hasn't though.
I couldn't agree more. Bjarne Riis and Jan Ulrich certainly should have their titles stripped too.The trouble is that these people apparently don't understand why it is cheating. All of them seem to think that because they were all doing it, it means no one was cheating. They don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that it is cheating because it is against the rules.
Maybe they cling to that as a way to justify it to themselves perhaps?
GarryDK said:
According to these guys and what was said by Armstrong himself was cheating means gaining an edge on your opponent, and seeing as everyone was doping they all thought they were doing no wrong. They made a scape goat out of Armstrong to force people to think, they went for the biggest name in cycling and he was stupid enough to get caught.
They are cheats because they broke the rules of the game. It doesn't matter whether LA or the others think they were not doing anything wrong, They were, it doesn't matter how they spin it. It shows how delusional cheating at this level makes you. Armstrong has been made a scapegoat more for his behaviour than his doping IMO. As for the rest? These aren't bad people, they just made some bad choices. That's unfortunate for them but that's how it goes. LA is a different ball game altogether though. Personally I think he needs some help, he may of course be getting that.
I think the moment he can look his audience in the eye and say "yes I cheated and treated people in a terrible fashion and for that im sorry" (and sound like he means it) instead of harping on about how he thinks people still consider him a 7 time TdF winner, is the moment people will genuinely start to forgive him.
All professional athletes break the rules somehow, they all "cheat". That's professional sport. Wtf do you think bodysuits were in swimming? Football, rugby? Neil Back in rugby and Colin Chapman in F1 damn nr made art forms out of it.
As for how can the Mig look anybody in the eye? Seriously? Good luck finding anybody who would seriously question that the Mig was arguably one of the best blokes ever to put feet on pedals. With or without any help. In your moral little scope maybe in the real world you will be laughed at to your face.
As for how can the Mig look anybody in the eye? Seriously? Good luck finding anybody who would seriously question that the Mig was arguably one of the best blokes ever to put feet on pedals. With or without any help. In your moral little scope maybe in the real world you will be laughed at to your face.
DJRC said:
All professional athletes break the rules somehow, they all "cheat". That's professional sport. Wtf do you think bodysuits were in swimming? Football, rugby? Neil Back in rugby and Colin Chapman in F1 damn nr made art forms out of it.
As for how can the Mig look anybody in the eye? Seriously? Good luck finding anybody who would seriously question that the Mig was arguably one of the best blokes ever to put feet on pedals. With or without any help. In your moral little scope maybe in the real world you will be laughed at to your face.
You seem very angry, try some deep breathing. Yes, I'm questioning Saint Indurains (along with the others) integrity after suggesting such a blatant cheat have his 'wins' reinstated. As for how can the Mig look anybody in the eye? Seriously? Good luck finding anybody who would seriously question that the Mig was arguably one of the best blokes ever to put feet on pedals. With or without any help. In your moral little scope maybe in the real world you will be laughed at to your face.
And shock horror, I've had conversations in the real world about this whole farce and some of those people agreed with me and some didn't. Those that didn't didn't laugh at me though.
It's unrealistic to suggest that cheating can be wiped out if that's what you are trying to say. You seem to almost embrace it. Very odd.
Of course I embrace cheating! All sports fans do.
Its hypocritocal not to. The question though is where to draw the line. Without "cheating" half the legends about rugby wouldnt be viable. Neil Back's hand on the ruck, 99, dodgy forward pass leading to a try, etc,etc. As the phrase goes...dark arts of the scrum. Without "cheating" we would never have had Atherton v Donald when Father's blatantly gloved it but didn't walk. You will find barely a cricket fan in the world who will say cricket is poorer for the battle that ensued. Senna cheated regularly. Prost v Senna is defined by two !omemts of cheating...that battle/relationship is now regarded as the defining context of Motorsport.
Armstrong is vilified not because he cheated but because of his sociopathic attitude about and to it. Society accepts cheating, esp in sport, but it regards such things as having unwritten rules about how it should happen. To use rugby, how one cheats is very highly self regulated, eg Backs hand in scrum is amusing, lamping someone is OK, but tripping, stamping and gouging are not. Bloodgate is the defining aspect of rugby self regulating itself, it horrified everyone. For cricket the cheating debate is hottest around claiming catches. Not walking is hard bitten professional sportsmanship but claiming a half volley catch is cheating.
Bodysuits were cheating in swimming...clearly and massively but became accepted as a norm when everybody started to use one to stay on a level playing field. Being an external technological device made it easier for FINA to regulate and eventually ban though.
I celebrate cheating as part of the narrative of sport because its the narrative that is the relevent bit for good or bad. Marco Pantani was killed by doping. In your world he is to be ignored and forgotten as someone not worthy and yet I defy anyone, ANYONE who witnessed Dumbo going up a hill esp in that first tour he burst to fame on, to not smile, feel better watching it. Watching Dumbo do that was life affirming.
Your world is black and white. My world is all the colours of the rainbow. I'll take mine thanks.
Its hypocritocal not to. The question though is where to draw the line. Without "cheating" half the legends about rugby wouldnt be viable. Neil Back's hand on the ruck, 99, dodgy forward pass leading to a try, etc,etc. As the phrase goes...dark arts of the scrum. Without "cheating" we would never have had Atherton v Donald when Father's blatantly gloved it but didn't walk. You will find barely a cricket fan in the world who will say cricket is poorer for the battle that ensued. Senna cheated regularly. Prost v Senna is defined by two !omemts of cheating...that battle/relationship is now regarded as the defining context of Motorsport.
Armstrong is vilified not because he cheated but because of his sociopathic attitude about and to it. Society accepts cheating, esp in sport, but it regards such things as having unwritten rules about how it should happen. To use rugby, how one cheats is very highly self regulated, eg Backs hand in scrum is amusing, lamping someone is OK, but tripping, stamping and gouging are not. Bloodgate is the defining aspect of rugby self regulating itself, it horrified everyone. For cricket the cheating debate is hottest around claiming catches. Not walking is hard bitten professional sportsmanship but claiming a half volley catch is cheating.
Bodysuits were cheating in swimming...clearly and massively but became accepted as a norm when everybody started to use one to stay on a level playing field. Being an external technological device made it easier for FINA to regulate and eventually ban though.
I celebrate cheating as part of the narrative of sport because its the narrative that is the relevent bit for good or bad. Marco Pantani was killed by doping. In your world he is to be ignored and forgotten as someone not worthy and yet I defy anyone, ANYONE who witnessed Dumbo going up a hill esp in that first tour he burst to fame on, to not smile, feel better watching it. Watching Dumbo do that was life affirming.
Your world is black and white. My world is all the colours of the rainbow. I'll take mine thanks.
Edited by DJRC on Sunday 27th July 01:42
Not sure if this has been discussed, The number of abnormal test findings recorded by anti-doping authorities worldwide increased by more than 20% last year, according to a report by the World Anti-Doping Agency
Some shameless cutting and pasting from here
Looking at the ABP Blood Analysis Report, you can see that there was a 31% increase in terms of tests carried out for the passport - with a total of >23,000 analysed. The famous Cologne lab (detected the tiny amount of clenbuterol in Contador's sample a few years ago, are also now using a new steroid test that found 266 positives in the past year - see here) are no slouches overall, with about 2,600 tests analysed there. Only Moscow and Lausanne analyse more.
What's more interesting, however, is looking at the proportion of ABP tests coming from cycling. Again, if you look at the ABP report, you can see that a whopping 33% of all such tests come from cycling - a total of 7,429! The UCI are also top of the testing authorities in terms of numbers, with 5,246 tests carried out in total - 2280 in competition, the remainder OOC. This was twice as many as the next nearest authority, the IAAF.
When you look at the Sport Report then, you see this trend continue. In terms of total samples analyzed in Olympic sports/disciplines, cycling accounts for 22,252 tests (beaten into third by athletics and football - presumably due to larger testing pools). It had the greatest number of EPO tests out of any discipline (7322) by far, the second most HGH tests behind athletics and was again second for blood transfusion tests.
I should also point out that the percentage of adverse analytical findings is 1.2% for cycling. That's considerably lower than weightlifting (3.4%), wrestling (2.3%), American football (6%), automobile sports (5.4%) billiards (3.5%) and chess (1.9%) It has a similar level to athletics, boxing, etc, but is then also higher than several others. Those findings are in pages 2-7 of the Sport Report.
Report is [url]here|http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/2013-testing-figures/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=2013-testing-figures[/here]
Some shameless cutting and pasting from here
Looking at the ABP Blood Analysis Report, you can see that there was a 31% increase in terms of tests carried out for the passport - with a total of >23,000 analysed. The famous Cologne lab (detected the tiny amount of clenbuterol in Contador's sample a few years ago, are also now using a new steroid test that found 266 positives in the past year - see here) are no slouches overall, with about 2,600 tests analysed there. Only Moscow and Lausanne analyse more.
What's more interesting, however, is looking at the proportion of ABP tests coming from cycling. Again, if you look at the ABP report, you can see that a whopping 33% of all such tests come from cycling - a total of 7,429! The UCI are also top of the testing authorities in terms of numbers, with 5,246 tests carried out in total - 2280 in competition, the remainder OOC. This was twice as many as the next nearest authority, the IAAF.
When you look at the Sport Report then, you see this trend continue. In terms of total samples analyzed in Olympic sports/disciplines, cycling accounts for 22,252 tests (beaten into third by athletics and football - presumably due to larger testing pools). It had the greatest number of EPO tests out of any discipline (7322) by far, the second most HGH tests behind athletics and was again second for blood transfusion tests.
I should also point out that the percentage of adverse analytical findings is 1.2% for cycling. That's considerably lower than weightlifting (3.4%), wrestling (2.3%), American football (6%), automobile sports (5.4%) billiards (3.5%) and chess (1.9%) It has a similar level to athletics, boxing, etc, but is then also higher than several others. Those findings are in pages 2-7 of the Sport Report.
Report is [url]here|http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/2013-testing-figures/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=2013-testing-figures[/here]
Pit Pony said:
If he took chemicals that could not be found under testing, his pharmacist needs to get involved in the search for curing cancer.
if you want to be impressed read about Patrick Arnold, he is the guy who created the steroids in the BALCO scandal, specifically Tetrahydrogestrinone which "studies report that the potency of the drug is outstanding, surpassing, on a milligram per milligram basis, every known synthesized or commercial available anabolic steroid at the time of its development"I wouldn't be surprised if he had developed a few more, he's a genius when it comes to it.
When Mig was winning half the peleton had Asthma and needed and inhaler. In the 60's I think the drug of choice was Tonerdron (not sure of the spelling).
I was never a fan of Lance Armstrong but I have to agree with those who feel he is being mad to take the fall for over 60 years of drug taking most of which occurred before he was born.
I also do not like seeing people kicked whilst they are down it makes me feel uneasy.
I was never a fan of Lance Armstrong but I have to agree with those who feel he is being mad to take the fall for over 60 years of drug taking most of which occurred before he was born.
I also do not like seeing people kicked whilst they are down it makes me feel uneasy.
king convicted dopers back into the Olympics to win golds and then to run the teams!
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff